User talk:Nsk92/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Nsk92. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Nsk92,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

You were mentioned

You were mentioned here. I was wondering if you could clarify your position on the point referenced. Is the import of your "Support" !vote accurately captured by the following: "As Nsk92 states, listing names is really meant to help readers establish a political narrative in their imaginations"? Bus stop (talk) 15:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I am completely swamped in RL right now and don't have any time to participate in that discussion, not even in terms of a quick look. Nsk92 (talk) 11:23, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Nsk92,

News

The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
{{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Whitehead's algorithm

Please see my edits to Whitehead's algorithm.

\operatorname{} does not only prevent italics, but also results in context-dependent spacing, thus

{\begin{aligned}&5\operatorname {arccsc} \theta \\[5pt]&5\operatorname {arccsc} (\theta )\end{aligned}}

You see the space between the 5 are arccsc, and also that the space to the right of arccsc is larger in one of these than in the other.

Page ranges require an en-dash, not a hyphen. So do ranges of years or other numbers, or letters of the alphabet.

right: 782–800

wrong: 782-800

In non-TeX math notation, one italicizes variables, but not digits and not parentheses, etc. That is constistent with what TeX and LaTeX do. And spacing is used. Thus:

right: n = 2.

wrong: n = 2.

wrong: n=2.

wrong: n=2.

If the difference between ${\textstyle ||w||_{X}}$ and ${\textstyle \|w\|_{X}}$ is not conspicuous to you, contrast these:

{\begin{aligned}&||a||||b||\\[5pt]&\|a\|\|b\|\end{aligned}}

The first is coded as ||a|| ||b|| and the second as \|a\|\|b\|.

Michael Hardy (talk) 18:19, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Nsk92,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello Nsk92,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

New message from Stifle

Hello, Nsk92. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
Message added 14:59, 8 August 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stifle (talk) 14:59, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Adding stub tag

Please do not add a {{stub}} tag to an article if a specific stub tag {{xxx-stub}} is already there on it. SD0001 (talk) 19:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Ah, OK, thanks. Nsk92 (talk) 19:47, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Never Again Action

I'm working on it. There's a bunch of press from the past few months. Victor Grigas (talk) 19:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

OK, I see. It is just a PROD tag and you can remove it yourself, preferably after adding extra references. In general, with articles like this one, it is better to develop them first in your sandbox before posting to mainspace. Nsk92 (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor theories

Hi, you tagged Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor theories as too incomprehensible and technical. Was there anything in particular you thought could be improved or was it just the whole article? Bellowhead678 (talk) 22:27, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Let me put it this way. I am a professional PhD holding mathematician and even I could not really understand what the article is about or what is happening there. The lede in particular needs to be written in a way that at least somebody with a college bachelor degree in science can roughly understand what the article is about. In fact, since you are even asking this question here, you should aim for a beginning undergraduate student in physics or math as your audience. Use more hyperlinks to other relevant articles where readers can look up relevant terms. The main body of the article, the Action section, currently consists of a bunch of formulas, with almost no explanation of what they mean and in which context they arise. Preferably add a few sentences explaining in which context DHOST theories arise, how they are used, and where and by whom they were introduced. Nsk92 (talk) 22:40, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

WP:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Westman (writer)

A couple of things.

1- Two of the books are available at Amazon if you have a kindle. Yes you have to buy them but Amazon has a very lenient return policy. You can get a refund for 21 days.

2- @MilborneOne: editor and administrator MilborneOne added details[1] to Westman's article. Which makes me think, MO has a source and that Westman may exist. I've pinged him....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

This discussion properly belongs at the AfD page itself. If you raise these points there, I'll respond there. Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 22:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Arnaud Cochet

Hi ! I was wondering why did you put a third party tag to Arnaud Cochet ? All the sources are official decrees published by the French government to notify the public that some position have been filled... The tag doesn't belong there

CocoricoPolynesien (talk) 06:07, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

I reread the tag : the source is official, you will not find better because this is there that France publishes its laws since 1869. It is not self published and the most reliable source you will ever find as it is the document that makes authority !

CocoricoPolynesien (talk) 06:25, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

I probably should have used a different tag when doing NPP on this article. The point is that official government decrees about his appointments, while official and reliable, are primary sources. Wikipedia articles, per WP:NOR#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources policy, are supposed to be based mainly on secondary sources, see WP:PSTS for details. The article needs to include some secondary sources, such as newspaper articles about Arnaud Cochet. I'll replace the tag with the correct one. Nsk92 (talk) 09:45, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Oooh, okay ! I'll try to find some articles then ! Good day ! CocoricoPolynesien (talk) 09:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Tags on Eldren Bailey

Hello! You tagged this article for linkrot and as an orphan. Both tags are incorrect: it has no bare URLS in sources and is not an orphan. I've removed the tags. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

References number 8 and 10 in the article are bare URLs, so they still need to be fixed. You are correct that the article is not an orphan. I somehow missed the List of outsider artists in the What links here link. Nsk92 (talk) 19:15, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

I have fixed refs 8 and 10 now. Nsk92 (talk) 19:21, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. You might be speeding through these page patrols too quickly; I was able to fix several pages that you tagged, with about as many clicks as it took to tag them. I also found and fixed one or to others that were incorrectly tagged. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

RE: Proposed deletion of Martino Lupini

The proposed deletion is based on an arbitrary interpretation of a Wikipedia criterion. Therefore I strongly object this deletion prpopsal.--Justi Rino (talk) 01:39, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

That is, of course, your prerogative. I'll list the article for an AfD for an in-depth deletion discussion. Nsk92 (talk) 01:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Victoria Pickett

I know that it's been awhile since you approved the article, but that doesn't make it any less appreciated from me. I just wanted to express thanks for reviewing my article and the articles of others in New Pages Patrol, especially since there's a backlog. Clovermoss (talk) 06:14, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, sure, you are welcome. Nsk92 (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aleksandra Miroslaw, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wujiang (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for adding Thomas S. K. Chang Merit Award to his page

Can we create a REDIRECT page Thomas S. K. Chang Merit Award to his page for if someone create these AWARD RECIPIENTS's page? --Htmlzycq (talk) 05:01, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, sure, if you like you can go ahead and create a redirect. I am not sure, though, if such a redirect would really be helpful. The phrase "Thomas S. K. Chang Merit Award" is pretty long and it beings with "Thomas S. K. Chang". So when somebody types this phrase in a search window, the WP auto-suggest feature will already point them to the Thomas S. K. Chang page before they get to typing the "Merit" part. Nsk92 (talk) 11:35, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

However, I did add diasambiguation notices to Thomas S. K. Chang and Thomas Chang articles. Nsk92 (talk) 11:42, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Roman Polianskyi at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 11:14, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Mike Wallace Is Here

Please see note on your DYK review.

In addition to checking that the five main DYK criteria have been met, you should also read the article and note if the grammar is lacking. We have contributors from all over the world, and not everyone knows English grammar. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:57, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, you do not have to go back and fix the tick on your review. Any new icons, such as my "no" tick, supersedes the old ones and no one will promote it until an approval tick is at the bottom of the review. I tried to revert your edit, but messed up the template. Could you restore your original tick and date stamp? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:18, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

OK, I'll try. I was worried that if one of my original ticks remains, the DYK bot will interpret it as "approved" and will sweep the nomination again to the approved noms page. Nsk92 (talk) 20:20, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. No, the bot won't move it until there's an approval tick at the end. And we can always move it back manually. Yoninah (talk) 20:27, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Ah, OK, very good, thanks. Nsk92 (talk) 20:28, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Sergei Chernyshev (breakdancer)

On 10 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sergei Chernyshev (breakdancer), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Russian breakdancer Sergei Chernyshev, the 2018 Youth Olympics B-Boys champion, competes under the nickname Bumblebee, after a robot superhero in the Transformers franchise? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sergei Chernyshev (breakdancer). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sergei Chernyshev (breakdancer)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/B. M. Kutty

Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 22:10, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello Nsk92,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion

Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

Not English

A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.

Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Jack Malloch article

Hi, I received an alert that you had made recommendations regarding improvements to the Jack Malloch article, but can find no such recommendations anywhere. Not that it matters; I am no longer involved on WP, I just came back here to tidy up before leaving for good. FYI, (assuming you added the citations template, which I didn't check), there seems to be little or no information about the man anywhere on the internet. The best single resource is the one already fully cited - the jackmalloch.com site. There is also apparently a book which has been published and is nominally available through the site, but messages to the administrators go unanswered. By all means, if you want to go ahead and make further changes to the article, be my guest. Edits to the content of this site (i.e., Wikipedia) are no longer my concern. I'm done here. Good luck. Cadar (talk) 19:45, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

I came accroos this article while doing NPP, and the only thing I did there was to mark the article as reviewed and tag it with the refimprove tag (Template:More citations needed). The notification you received was presumably automatically generated by the curation tool after that. The only reference currently in the article is to www.jackmalloch.com, which is why I added the refimprive tag. The www.jackmalloch.com site seems to be run by friends and/or relatives of Jack Malloch, so the source is likely not independent, and it is also unclear if the source satisfies WP:RS. So the article really needs some extra sources, badly. I found a book about Malloch listed at Amazon [2]. I am not sufficiently motivated to actually buy this book and see what's inside, but I'll add it as a source to the article. Nsk92 (talk) 20:13, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

@Cadar: I added several more sources to the Jack Malloch article (several books and one magazine article), and removed the refimprove tag. The page still needs more inline citations, but I must admit, I am not sufficiently interested in the topic to do more work there ... Nsk92 (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

I am very interested in the subject but have exactly zero interest in continuing to engage with Wikipedia in any editorial capacity. However, I don't have facilities for making online purchases, so unless I can persuade someone else to get the book, finalising the article would have to be up to someone else even if I was still involved. At least I did the groundwork. I'm not concerned about further citations. I'm sure that the contents are correct. They tally with what I personally remember about him and newspaper articles I have from the era. That's all that worries me, although it will frankly &@^$ me off if somebody takes it upon themselves to remove the article because of the lack of citations. But that's about what I'd expect here, hence my total disinterest in further involvement.

Thanks for the edits. I would have missed them but I just popped back on to deal with my email address here, and noticed a casing issue. All the best.

Cadar (talk) 18:48, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I am basically in the opposite situation. I have close to zero interest in the subject of this article but I do plan to stick around editing Wikipedia for a while. I think that now, with the extra sources added, the Jack Malloch article is not in danger of being deleted. The worst that might happen is that somebody will add a "more in-line citations needed" tag at the top of the article. At some point I might take a closer look at what's what there but likely not too soon. Nsk92 (talk) 19:16, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Doug Freuler

You should not have marked Doug Freuler's wikipedia entry for Speedy Deletion. You have wielded your power arbitrarily to delete this page. As I just noted on the talk page for his now-deleted page, "his page should not be speedily deleted because his contributions, which were written about and cited, puts him in the pantheon of minor musicians which includes his contribution to music theory with his 1970's music theory text with Rudolf Steiner, and his historical place as the first improv teacher of Page McConnell of Phish; these two facts alone merit his inclusion in Wikipedia.

These two contributions importantly differ Doug from the hundreds of thousands of music teachers out there. To delete is to exercise arbitrary power to determine what facts rise to meet an arbitrary threshhold."

Republish. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayslearnedstuff (talk • contribs) 15:35, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

I did not delete the article, I only tagged it. (Any user here, including you, can tag any page for deletion if the page appears to satisfy one of the WP:CSD criteria for speedy deletion). I dont remember anything about this article and I cannot view it now and cannot undelete it because I am not an administrator here. The tag was reviwed by administrator User:Justlettersandnumbers who then actually deleted the page. You need to contact that administrator to discuss undeletion options. Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 16:57, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Roman Polianskyi

On 16 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Roman Polianskyi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 2016 Paralympics para-rowing gold medalist Roman Polianskyi started experiencing symptoms of Strumpell disease at the age of ten? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Roman Polianskyi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Roman Polianskyi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

valereee (talk) 00:01, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

AfC

Hi. Following your request, I have added your account to the list of AfC reviewers. If you have any questions or need any assistance, don't hesitate to ask at the Help Desk. Do bear in mind however, that New Page Review is also severely backlogged and is a higher priority. It needs all the help it can get. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:12, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Ok, very good, thanks! Nsk92 (talk) 23:42, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello Nsk92,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 809 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.

Coordinator

Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.

This month's refresher course

Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.

Tools

It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.

Reviewer Feedback

Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.

Arbitration Committee

The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.

Community Wish list

There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.

To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to discus the rule on whether to include the victims names

Dear Nsk92,

I hereby invite you to discuss a possible new rule on whether or not the name of victims should be included on various articles (i.e. Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, Santa Fe High School shooting.

The discussion can be found here: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Victims'_names_proposal_workshop

TheHoax (talk) 17:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Aaron Hawkins (engineer)

On 26 November 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Aaron Hawkins (engineer), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Aaron Hawkins uses nail polish to guide laser light into optofluidic devices to detect antibiotic resistance? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Aaron Hawkins (engineer)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

--valereee (talk) 00:02, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days
Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Review page

This Page "Amir_Hossein_Rostami" is a iranian actor. There are many resources defined for this page. Please review and approve this page Amir3030 (talk) 07:05, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello Nsk92,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

In 2018, you offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has now accepted that request for arbitration, and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

All content, links, and diffs from the original ARC and the latest ARC are being read into the evidence for this case.

The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org

For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas³ (talk) 17:20, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Punctuation and mathematical notation

Please see my recent edits to Cannon–Thurston map. In particular:

It is not only in the article title and the opening sentence that an en-dash rather than a hyphen is used in "Cannon–Thurston". There were three section headings in which the phrase conspicuously appeared with a hyphen, and some other instances within the article.
One does not indiscriminately italicize everything in non-TeX mathematical notation. One italicizes variables but not parentheses or other punctuation, and not things like cos, log, max, det, mod, Mod, etc., and not capital Greek letters. The point is simply to be consistent with the way TeX and LaTeX do these things.
Proper spacing:

right: 2 + 3 = 5

wrong: 2+3=5

This is also consistent with TeX and LaTeX usage.

Michael Hardy (talk) 15:07, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

RFA q

Nsk92, would you consider expanding your RFA question from "any posts by" to "any posts by or about". I was curious about the same issue since it has been mentioned by several !voters, but don't want to burden the candidate with another q, which would be only a minor variant of yours. Abecedare (talk) 17:49, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

Hi Nsk92, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Hello Nsk92,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources

A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Trolling

Yes of course it's trollish, but since it will have no effect on anything whatsoever the only reasonable action in response to it is to ignore it. That goes for admins, bureaucrats, and everyone else. --JBL (talk) 15:18, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

In the abstract, you are right, but in reality things just dont work that way. A highly POINTy trollish oppose like that one acts like a magnet and attracts too much attention. People are going to notice it and comment below it, and the thread there is gowing to get longer and more contentious. In this situation I think that striking the oppose is the least bad option. Nsk92 (talk) 15:35, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Of course things work that way. Here is how to avoid being trolled: when someone writes something trollish, ignore it. The fact that a dozen or so people have failed to follow the most basic rule of the internet is an embarrassment to each of them personally; that some people may do dumb or embarrassing things is an incredibly poor reason to do the dumb thing yourself. --JBL (talk) 21:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I am talking about what actually happens in practice. Personally, I have already stopped posting in the thread below that oppose and don't intent to continue. But look at what happened since my previous comment here, the one above with timestamp 15:35. The thread below the oppose grew considerably. It'll continue to grow, despite any pleas to let the matter drop and let the oppose !vote just be. There are enough people who just can't help themselves and yet more others who won't take time to read through the entire thread to figure out what's what. In a situation like that it's better to just strike the oppose. Letting it be simply isn't going to happen. Nsk92 (talk) 21:27, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Premature "Speedy Deletion"

Hello. I think you did a "Premature speedy deletion" request on Impeachment Articles against Mike DeWine. About a month ago, the article went though a AFD discussion, which resulted in it becoming a draft. More information was added and it was moved back to article space. During that move, it passed the AFC process (Had other editors review it). After passing the AFC process, another editor challenged it (See the talk page). The other editor agreed at the end of the discussion that it barely passed notability. I think you did a speedy deletion without reading any discussion.

In the future, please read any current talk about notability/deletion before requesting "Speedy Deletions". Elijahandskip (talk) 11:54, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, please. I didn't miss anything, I did see the talk page discussion. It just shows that a bunch of junk frequently passes through AfC, as it did here. The article is still substantially the same as the AfD deleted version. It still manifestly fails WP:NOTNEWS. If for some reason the G4 is declined, I'll nominate for AfD again and request that the title be salted this time. Nsk92 (talk) 12:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand how articles of impeachment on a US governor isn't notable enough for wikipedia. Makes 0 sense.... Please explain. Elijahandskip (talk) 12:59, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

If we ever get to the AfD stage, I'll expound there. Not every political stunt that flashes through the newsheadlines for a couple of days and then disappears into oblivion deserves a Wikipedia article. That's what WP:NOTNEWS is about. Nsk92 (talk) 13:02, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Main thing is it was already discussed. Other editors say it barely passes notability. The articles never got voted on, however, they did inspire a new bill to be passed which prevents ohio governors from basically doing what happened in March. Governors can't do tons of mass closures anymore. So the outcome wasn't impeachment, but a bill that prevents mass shutdowns. Elijahandskip (talk) 13:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

You are free to make that argument in the next AfD. Including trying to assert that the bill you mentioned really grew out of this "impeachment" effort here. Usually in a situation like that the notable thing is the bill/law, and the WP article should be written about that, with whatever gnoceological roots inspired the bill mentioned there. Nsk92 (talk)

Tagging of Impeachment Articles against Mike DeWine

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Impeachment Articles against Mike DeWine. I do not think that Impeachment Articles against Mike DeWine fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because The AfD result was draftify, not delete, so G4 does not apply. If you wish, you may try using the simple proposed deletion (PROD) process, or the full articles for deletion (AfD) process, instead, if this was an article, or another process such as MfD or XfD as appropriate. Please remember that speedy deletion should only be used in cases where it will be uncointroversial. If it iis predictable that mamy good faith editors will dispute ma speedy deletion, then it is not a proper speedy deletion in the first place. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: OK, thanks. I have listed the page for another AfD. However, a bit of a technical issue arose. After Twinkle processed the AfD nomination, I realized that the page's title changed slightly from what it was at the time of the first AfD. So the new AfD that was created today, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Impeachment Articles against Mike DeWine, was not listed as AfD 2, and was not automatically linked to the previous AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Impeachment inquiry against Mike DeWine. I added a note about this fact, but I don't know if there's a better solution. If you could offer some technical help here, I would very much appreciate it. Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 20:21, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

The needed boxed link has now been added, as well as a link in the discussion. I think this amply fulfills the purpose, to let participants in the current discussion kn ow about and read the previous one. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:50, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Regarding G4, I had thought that 'draftify' is a form of deletion but I admit that I did not encounter this situation before and perhaps have not given the distiction enough thought. Nsk92 (talk) 21:05, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

"No draftification is one of the alternatives to deletion. It suggests a need for improvement not done under the pressure of an AfD, but does not in any way constitute an agreement to delete, nor is there an implied minimum time spent in draft if sufficient improvements are made. Whether the changes in this case are sufficient is the key issue for the 2nd AfD in my view. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Death and funeral of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:13, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Saipancakes

Hello Nsk92. I have userfied this article to your userspace as you requested at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saipancakes (2nd nomination). You can find it at user:Nsk92/Saipancakes. Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

OK, great, thank you very much! Nsk92 (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hamdi Zurqani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mapping.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Can you take a look?

I examined GizzyCatBella's last 500-1000 edits. I placed what I found in User:Astral Leap/sandbox. Do you think this should be submitted? And if it is, what board should it be reported on?--Astral Leap (talk) 09:44, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Hmm. I must admit that my knowledge of Polish history is extremely limited, so my opinion here is not going to be particularly well informed. My initial impression is that most of the diffs that you cite probably would not be viewed at AE as direct violation of the topic ban although they certainly skirt close. To my eye, the two possible exceptions are the prison [3] and the Potsdam Conference[4] where I think a convincing case could be made that the articles in question do fall within the topic ban. As you say, the future of Poland was a major topic at the Potsdam conference and the post-WWII arrangements between the allies regarding Poland were essentially finalized there. The article Bereza Kartuska Prison mentions WWII events in the lede and in the history section, and the history section discusses that some Poles suspected of pro-German symathies were incarcerated there right before the war. The article doesn't say anything about the Jews being imprisoned there, so you'd have to explain that in any AE filing. You could try filing an AE report about a topic ban vilation, say based on these two edits. I am not sure what would happen there, as I don't have any prior experience with filing AE reports myself. Possibly worth a try. Nsk92 (talk) 10:28, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I placed a report after clarifying and beefing up with a couple of references. If that's skirting close, she's doing an awful lot of it.--Astral Leap (talk) 11:41, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter

Hello Nsk92,

Year in review

It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	DannyS712 bot III (talk)	67,552	Patrol Page Curation
2	Rosguill (talk)	63,821	Patrol Page Curation
3	John B123 (talk)	21,697	Patrol Page Curation
4	Onel5969 (talk)	19,879	Patrol Page Curation
5	JTtheOG (talk)	12,901	Patrol Page Curation
6	Mcampany (talk)	9,103	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	6,401	Patrol Page Curation
8	Mccapra (talk)	4,918	Patrol Page Curation
9	Hughesdarren (talk)	4,520	Patrol Page Curation
10	Utopes (talk)	3,958	Patrol Page Curation

Reviewer of the Year

John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.

NPP Technical Achievement Award

As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for LauncherOne

On 21 January 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article LauncherOne, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 01:35, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Kurds and Kurdistan case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 5, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 16:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Proposed decision posted at the open Kurds and Kurdistan case

In the open Kurds and Kurdistan arbitration case, the proposed decision has now been posted. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. You were notified as you made comments in the case request. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 16:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan closed

An arbitration case regarding Kurds and Kurdistan has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed.
GPinkerton (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
GPinkerton (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
Thepharoah17 (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
عمرو بن كلثوم (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
Supreme Deliciousness (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
Paradise Chronicle is warned to avoid casting aspersions and repeating similar uncollegial conduct in the future.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 14:32, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan closed

Arbitration Case Opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 13, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, SQL ^{Query me!} 04:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

2021 Boulder shooting

I noticed you reverted the addition, as it stands a majority of editors in the dicussion supported the inclusion of it. Frankly, I thought it was very scummy of the other editor to goad you into removing it instead of discussing its inclusion and the deletion of it. CaliIndie (talk) 11:48, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I have commented at the article's talk page, and that's where the discussion should continue. Nsk92 (talk) 12:00, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Phillip Adams (American football)

On 9 April 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Phillip Adams (American football), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 11:11, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Re. closed AE thread

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited One-relator group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Normal closure.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

DS 2021 Review Update

Dear Nsk92,

Thank you for participating in the recent discretionary sanctions community consultation. We are truly appreciative of the range of feedback we received and the high quality discussion which occurred during the process. We have now posted a summary of the feedback we've received and also a preview of some of what we expect to happen next. We hope that the second phase, a presentation of draft recommendations, will proceed on time in June or early July. You will be notified when this phase begins, unless you choose to to opt-out of future mailings by removing your name here.
--Barkeep49 & KevinL (aka L235) 21:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Gansu ultramarathon disaster

On 24 May 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Gansu ultramarathon disaster, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:00, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Nsk92:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1800 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

Hello Nsk92,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions topic area changes

In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.

The topics proposed for revocation are:

Senkaku islands
Waldorf education
Ancient Egyptian race controversy
Scientology
Landmark worldwide

The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:

India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
Armenia/Azerbaijan

Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.

Community feedback is invited and welcome at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. --Barkeep49 (talk) 16:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions topic area changes

In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.

The topics proposed for revocation are:

Senkaku islands
Waldorf education
Ancient Egyptian race controversy
Scientology
Landmark worldwide

The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:

India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
Armenia/Azerbaijan

Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.

Community feedback is invited and welcome at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. --Barkeep49 (talk) 04:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022

Hello Nsk92,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 809 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 845 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022

Hello Nsk92,

Backlog status

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000^[a] at the end of May.

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.^[b]

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

Backlog drive

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.

TIP – New school articles

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.

Misc

There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 14656 articles, as of 08:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.

Reminders

Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Notes

^ not including another ~6,000 redirects
^ The number of weekly reviews reported in the NPP feed includes redirects, which are not included in the backlog we primarily track.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!

New Page Patrol \| July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022

Hello Nsk92,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

Coordination: MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.

Open letter to the WMF: The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.

TIP - Reviewing by subject: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.

New reviewers: The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.

Reminders

Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message

Hi Nsk92,

Invitation

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP Award for 2019

		The New Page Reviewer's Iron Award
		For over 360 article reviews during 2019. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:08, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Here is a barnstar to show appreciation for the NPP reviews you did back in 2019. We realize this is late, but NPP fell behind in some coordination activities. We are almost caught up. If you don't want to receive "old" barnstars, please just ignore this and reply to let us know not to send you any more. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:08, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Update: Phase II of DS reform now open for comment

You were either a participant in WP:DS2021 (the Arbitration Committee's Discretionary Sanctions reform process) or requested to be notified about future developments regarding DS reform. The Committee now presents Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions/2021-22_review/Phase_II_consultation, and invites your feedback. Your patience has been appreciated. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions review: proposed decision and community review

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process. The Proposed Decision phase of the discretionary sanctions review process has now opened. A five-day public review period for the proposed decision, before arbitrators cast votes on the proposed decision, is open through November 18. Any interested editors are invited to comment on the proposed decision talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Contentious topics procedure adopted

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process.

The Arbitration Committee has concluded the 2021-22 review of the contentious topics system (formerly known as discretionary sanctions), and its final decision is viewable at the revision process page. As part of the review process, the Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

The above proposals that are supported by an absolute majority of unrecused active arbitrators are hereby enacted. The drafting arbitrators (CaptainEek, L235, and Wugapodes) are directed to take the actions necessary to bring the proposals enacted by this motion into effect, including by amending the procedures at WP:AC/P and WP:AC/DS. The authority granted to the drafting arbitrators by this motion expires one month after enactment.

The Arbitration Committee thanks all those who have participated in the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process and all who have helped bring it to a successful conclusion. This motion concludes the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process.

This motion initiates a one-month implementation period for the updates to the contentious topics system. The Arbitration Committee will announce when the initial implementation of the Committee's decision has concluded and the amendments made by the drafting arbitrators in accordance with the Committee's decision take effect. Any editors interested in the implementation process are invited to assist at the implementation talk page, and editors interested in updates may subscribe to the update list.

For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Contentious topics procedure adopted

Contentious topics procedure now in effect

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's contentious topics procedure revision process.

In December, the Arbitration Committee adopted the contentious topics procedure, which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period.

For a detailed summary of the changes from the discretionary sanctions system, see WP:DSVSCT.
A brief guide for administrators may be found at Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Administrator instructions.
Updated templates may be found at Template:Contentious topics.
Suggestions and concerns may be directed to the arbitration clerk team at WT:AC/C.

The drafting arbitrators warmly thank all those who have worked to implement the new procedure during this implementation period and beyond. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Contentious topics procedure now in effect

Orphaned non-free image File:Bulletin of Mathematical Sciences (logo).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bulletin of Mathematical Sciences (logo).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:12, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol \| May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol needs your help!

Hello Nsk92,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 2021 Colorado Springs shooting for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2021 Colorado Springs shooting, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021 Colorado Springs shooting (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter

Hello Nsk92,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello Nsk92:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 1800 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Replaceable non-free use File:Romanov 185x246 348329a.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Romanov 185x246 348329a.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

[1] t including another ~6,000 redirects

[2] The number of weekly reviews reported in the NPP feed includes redirects, which are not included in the backlog we primarily track.

[a]

[b]